Pilot handling skills under threat, says Airbus
Join Date: Jan 2008
Location: US
Posts: 251
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
iceman50:
What difference does it make to the monitoring pilot whether the automatics are in or out? The altitude assignments, course tracking and speed/configuration requirements are the same are they not, or are you suggesting that there is a lower level of monitoring required with the automatics in? and might such an assumption be key to the problem under discussion here?
I wonder what your FO's think of all your hand flying as they try to monitor you, do the radio and tune your aids, or do you do that as well being such an "ACE"!
I really do find this claptrap about "overloaded F/Os" quite amazing. In all of the companies that I flew for in my last 30 years of aviation the "gimme rule" was the SOP.
For those that don't understand the "gimme rule" it simply states that when you are flying the aircraft with the automatics engaged, then you made your own selections on the FMS etc and the PNF monitored your actions.
When you were hand-flying the aircraft, then the "gimme rule" prevailed. You asked the PNF to push the buttons as requested and you monitored that he had indeed selected what you asked for.
For any F/O to admit that he feels overloaded and unable to monitor what is going on is either talking boll*cks or needs to go away and review the career that they have chosen.
Where I came from, flight directors and auto pilots were either non-existent or were very primitive.
Mind you, what do I know about high pressure situations. After three years based at JFK on the DC-10, LHR and LGW were an absolute breeze.
Some of you out there really need to sit down and seriously ask yourselves if you are up to dealing with the unthinkable when it happens.
As I have discovered, one day it surely will.
For those that don't understand the "gimme rule" it simply states that when you are flying the aircraft with the automatics engaged, then you made your own selections on the FMS etc and the PNF monitored your actions.
When you were hand-flying the aircraft, then the "gimme rule" prevailed. You asked the PNF to push the buttons as requested and you monitored that he had indeed selected what you asked for.
For any F/O to admit that he feels overloaded and unable to monitor what is going on is either talking boll*cks or needs to go away and review the career that they have chosen.
Where I came from, flight directors and auto pilots were either non-existent or were very primitive.
Mind you, what do I know about high pressure situations. After three years based at JFK on the DC-10, LHR and LGW were an absolute breeze.
Some of you out there really need to sit down and seriously ask yourselves if you are up to dealing with the unthinkable when it happens.
As I have discovered, one day it surely will.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: flyover country USA
Age: 82
Posts: 4,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
It's really and truly another level of redundancy:
- Two sets of controls, w/ (hopefully) two qualified pilots
- two sets of flight instruments
- two or more propulsion units
- two of each nav device
- etc.
- two operational modes (auto vs hand flying) with some grey area (autothrottles, etc.) in between
But redundancy does you no good unless you verify both sides of the equation are fully functional.
- Two sets of controls, w/ (hopefully) two qualified pilots
- two sets of flight instruments
- two or more propulsion units
- two of each nav device
- etc.
- two operational modes (auto vs hand flying) with some grey area (autothrottles, etc.) in between
But redundancy does you no good unless you verify both sides of the equation are fully functional.
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: Germany
Age: 67
Posts: 1,777
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: HK
Posts: 513
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
JW411 MU3001A ...still single Ladusvala Loose rivets Rananim
Perhaps you all should re-read Alpagueur320's first post. He was claiming that he hand flew raw data departures and arrivals 99% of the time. THAT was the comment, chest beating or willy waving that got me to start the whole argument.
So for just for the record there is nothing wrong with hand flying. When and where are the important decisions. This was also the reason I introduced the monitoring by the PM. As by saying 99% of the time one can only assume in fair weather and foul! Was this good AIRMANSHIP / CRM and did he infringe the other pilots comfort zone.
I am also NOT advocating just sitting back and casually monitoring the automatics either - you have to be "flying" the aircraft as well and be ready to take control. The number of times I have to remind my FO's to place their hands on the thrust levers whilst configuring and on approach is concerning - A/THR is engaged is sometimes the reply. Tell that to the Turkish crew and they had "moving" thrust levers!
Perhaps you all should re-read Alpagueur320's first post. He was claiming that he hand flew raw data departures and arrivals 99% of the time. THAT was the comment, chest beating or willy waving that got me to start the whole argument.
So for just for the record there is nothing wrong with hand flying. When and where are the important decisions. This was also the reason I introduced the monitoring by the PM. As by saying 99% of the time one can only assume in fair weather and foul! Was this good AIRMANSHIP / CRM and did he infringe the other pilots comfort zone.
I am also NOT advocating just sitting back and casually monitoring the automatics either - you have to be "flying" the aircraft as well and be ready to take control. The number of times I have to remind my FO's to place their hands on the thrust levers whilst configuring and on approach is concerning - A/THR is engaged is sometimes the reply. Tell that to the Turkish crew and they had "moving" thrust levers!
Psychophysiological entity
Iceman, you will find that sometimes folk answer, or comment upon, a post that precedes theirs - or one that is small number of post ahead. Not necessarily going back to one you're focused on. Or, perhaps, they may be prompted by a "Quote." There should be a way to tell easily which side of the fence they're on...but often this becomes clouded.
I concur. I really don't know what your saying, and indeed whatever it is you're thinking that brings us round to 'Willy Waving'.
.. it really sounds like you are suggesting hand flying is dangerous and should not be done.
Join Date: Sep 1999
Posts: 541
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Was this good AIRMANSHIP / CRM and did he infringe the other pilots comfort zone.
With your background,Iceman,Im surprised you dont shout this from the rooftops.
Lets face it, any twit can get by with max use of the automatics.
He said: "I am not a convinced Airbus believer and not a convinced automation user. I can understand it, can use it and recover from screw-ups, but two things mitigate full enthusiasm: Automation robs situational awareness through absence of physical/sensory cues of flying the machine and as a result atrophies flying and thinking skills, and when automation degrades, it can overwhelm even a highly competent, well trained crew. Other than that, automation, used as intended, (not an airplane baby-sitter, but tool for accuracy, predictably and timeliness of action), I am enthusiastic because it is a flight safety enhancement". Unquote
There is no doubt from many surveys of pilot attitude to automation, that loss of confidence of the ability to retain pure flying skills, is a major concern to the average thinking pilot. Passengers are entitled to think that the pilots on the flight deck are equally safe and competent at hand flying raw data (basic skills) as at watching the automatics at work. Few pilots would disagree with that sentiment. If they do disagree, methinks they are living in a fool's paradise.
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Georgia
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Layoff Iceman - he's right
jcjeant: thanks for that link to the Alpa presentation and speech *Captain Rory Kay: Executive Air Safety Chairman*
Twas a very enjoyable 20 minutes and bit of a change to watch a movie on a pc with my hands occupied.... taking notes
I've watched in some dismay as some of you have attacked Iceman50, misrepresented what he's said and attacked as if he's gone after not only your use of the Auto Pilot but after the very essence of your 'manhood' as well.
The "Willy Waving" is an essential component to consider.
I didnt get that from his comments at all, I sensed he was decrying the attitudes of a poster who seemed to have a wee bit more chest thumping than required
Now, Bud Holland is at a total extreme - but is your pendulum swinging in his direction?
Rananim's post to me was the most measured and appropriate of the handflying camp, encouraging careful CRM and being cognizant of the effects your actions may have on your 'somewhat less manly' colleague and his comfort level.
Basic Autopilot is so simple and safe, Airlines tend to demand it as SOP. No less an authority than the Delta Airlines safety audit for Korean Airlines said
*
The argument isnt (or shouldnt be ) is this Safe vs Unsafe, but rather 'Very Very Very Safe' vs 'Very Very Safe' you add to your safety balance anywhere and everywhere you can, to prevent the swiss cheese holes lining up.
*edit: It was pointed out in another thread that this 'Delta report' quoted were not the actual 'findings' see here http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/3...ml#post5200379
Twas a very enjoyable 20 minutes and bit of a change to watch a movie on a pc with my hands occupied.... taking notes
Some incidents referred to during his speech
26 MAY 2009 AAIB: final report on Boeing 737-300 stall during a go-around
British Airways 747-400 in serious take-off incident at Johannesburg
26 MAY 2009 AAIB: final report on Boeing 737-300 stall during a go-around
British Airways 747-400 in serious take-off incident at Johannesburg
The "Willy Waving" is an essential component to consider.
it really sounds like you are suggesting hand flying is dangerous and should not be done.
1994 Fairchild Air Force Base B-52 crash
The accident investigation concluded that the chain of events leading to the crash was primarily attributable to Holland's personality and behavior, USAF leaders' reactions (or lack thereof) to it, and the sequence of events during the mishap flight of the aircraft. Today, the crash is used in military and civilian aviation environments as a case study in teaching crew resource management. Also, the crash is often used by the US armed forces during aviation safety training as an example of the importance of compliance with safety regulations and correcting the behavior of anyone who violates safety procedures.
The accident investigation concluded that the chain of events leading to the crash was primarily attributable to Holland's personality and behavior, USAF leaders' reactions (or lack thereof) to it, and the sequence of events during the mishap flight of the aircraft. Today, the crash is used in military and civilian aviation environments as a case study in teaching crew resource management. Also, the crash is often used by the US armed forces during aviation safety training as an example of the importance of compliance with safety regulations and correcting the behavior of anyone who violates safety procedures.
Rananim's post to me was the most measured and appropriate of the handflying camp, encouraging careful CRM and being cognizant of the effects your actions may have on your 'somewhat less manly' colleague and his comfort level.
Basic Autopilot is so simple and safe, Airlines tend to demand it as SOP. No less an authority than the Delta Airlines safety audit for Korean Airlines said
23. A monitored/coupled approach procedure should be implemented. Suggested autopilot usage - When flying manually, PF calls for all changes and settings required. Once autopilot engaged PF may make own MCP selections until on intercept headings for a monitored approach or cat 11 approach. AP must be used as soon as possible after take off and until final approach for risk management. AP's usage requires anticipation and skill. Pilots with poor anticipation battle with AP usage. Testing pilot flying skills is done in the simulator and not in the aircraft.
The argument isnt (or shouldnt be ) is this Safe vs Unsafe, but rather 'Very Very Very Safe' vs 'Very Very Safe' you add to your safety balance anywhere and everywhere you can, to prevent the swiss cheese holes lining up.
*edit: It was pointed out in another thread that this 'Delta report' quoted were not the actual 'findings' see here http://www.pprune.org/rumours-news/3...ml#post5200379
Last edited by cessnapuppy; 19th Sep 2009 at 14:09.
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Uh... Where was I?
Posts: 1,338
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
I agree with you regarding thje "attacks" against Iceman.
He mainly reacted to Alpagueur320's 99% (of course exaggerated).
And he advocated for automation, which is not a crime, right?
But this report you quote... Does not seem very proffesional. What a manner of despising hand flying!
Those who want to keep their hand flying skills are just idiots who believe themselves "the right stuff" test pilots.
And... Flying with the AP is so, so difficult! You have to be alert like a hawk, because if you relax for a second..... boooooooom!
Come on!
I can smell lawyers...
He mainly reacted to Alpagueur320's 99% (of course exaggerated).
And he advocated for automation, which is not a crime, right?
But this report you quote... Does not seem very proffesional. What a manner of despising hand flying!
Those who want to keep their hand flying skills are just idiots who believe themselves "the right stuff" test pilots.
And... Flying with the AP is so, so difficult! You have to be alert like a hawk, because if you relax for a second..... boooooooom!
Come on!
I can smell lawyers...
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Georgia
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
lol
Oh no. I am sure that most (perhaps that oft mentioned '99%') are cautious and concerned and conscientious - Use it or lose it. It took every one of Capt. Sully's 60+ years of professional expertise (and private experience flying unpowered aircraft) to not only know what he could do but what he could not do
But flying commercial airliners is a team effort. Whenever one starts to freelance, no matter how well intentioned, that is a precursor to disaster (It can perhaps be countered by some that getting up and brushing one's teeth is similarly dangerous as we all know the French practice good dental hygiene...and look what happened!)
I dont think it's fair to the pilot to have to 'wiggle in' a hand job here or there, solely to keep himself sharp for when the inevitable happens (and it usually does, one of the Airbus' set of Alternate laws is Murphy's Law.. j/k ok..and Boeing too) only to be career ended when the investigation notes that He/She deviated from SOP to 'hand fly' mentioned off paragraph in the report, as damning as a line that said he went off to read Playboy in the loo.
Frankly, its not just 'automatics' and being dependent on them - it's the whole programming logic behind automation, some of it quite bullocks:
Take Johannesburg. The system *thought there was a thrust reversal, and retracted the flaps, an almost fatal move for take off. If that flight was like the Concorde, with a bit of a tailwind and a bit overweight, they would be not a bit, but 100% dead!
It's obvious that that part of the system didnt plan for failure. The pilots did, and the pax were saved..this time. Of course, if 'pilot action' saved the day, then it would be 'pilot error' if Johannesburg had gone belly up.
Those who want to keep their hand flying skills are just idiots who believe themselves "the right stuff" test pilots.
But flying commercial airliners is a team effort. Whenever one starts to freelance, no matter how well intentioned, that is a precursor to disaster (It can perhaps be countered by some that getting up and brushing one's teeth is similarly dangerous as we all know the French practice good dental hygiene...and look what happened!)
I dont think it's fair to the pilot to have to 'wiggle in' a hand job here or there, solely to keep himself sharp for when the inevitable happens (and it usually does, one of the Airbus' set of Alternate laws is Murphy's Law.. j/k ok..and Boeing too) only to be career ended when the investigation notes that He/She deviated from SOP to 'hand fly' mentioned off paragraph in the report, as damning as a line that said he went off to read Playboy in the loo.
Frankly, its not just 'automatics' and being dependent on them - it's the whole programming logic behind automation, some of it quite bullocks:
Take Johannesburg. The system *thought there was a thrust reversal, and retracted the flaps, an almost fatal move for take off. If that flight was like the Concorde, with a bit of a tailwind and a bit overweight, they would be not a bit, but 100% dead!
It's obvious that that part of the system didnt plan for failure. The pilots did, and the pax were saved..this time. Of course, if 'pilot action' saved the day, then it would be 'pilot error' if Johannesburg had gone belly up.
Last edited by cessnapuppy; 20th Sep 2009 at 01:48. Reason: tidy up some grammar caused by using the automatic spellchecker!
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Eight years flying the Airbus and never left normal law.
Real people on board = leave the automatics in and maximise situational awareness. Manual flight immediately raises flight deck workload.
If you passed the IR/last sim then you clearly have at least basic instrument skills.
Practise your instrument flying skills in the sim every 6 months - without real people on board!
In short, life's too short for manual flight in the commercial arena. As a pax, knowing what you know, with your wife and kids on board, would you prefer the automatics/flight director to be on or off?
Real people on board = leave the automatics in and maximise situational awareness. Manual flight immediately raises flight deck workload.
If you passed the IR/last sim then you clearly have at least basic instrument skills.
Practise your instrument flying skills in the sim every 6 months - without real people on board!
In short, life's too short for manual flight in the commercial arena. As a pax, knowing what you know, with your wife and kids on board, would you prefer the automatics/flight director to be on or off?
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: UK
Posts: 341
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Knowing that your wife and kids are on board.. AND.. the aircraft has had a technical problem leaving the aircraft in Alternate Law.
Would you rather have a pilot that practices with the automation out a few times a week, or one that only does it for 20 minutes every 6 months?
Would you rather have a pilot that practices with the automation out a few times a week, or one that only does it for 20 minutes every 6 months?
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: UK
Posts: 415
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Is despatch even allowed if in alternate law?? I'm truly not sure on this one, and anyway, this has never been an issue in my experience.
Misuse of the automatics has caused many an incident / accident (not to mention an occurance). Perhaps if they had practised their autopilot management skills a bit more.....
We ALL imagine the day when we'll be on battery only and treating our Airbus like it was a Cessna and we train for that in the sim.
I really don't want to sound complacent but let's face it: the thing we should really practise is the use use of the autopilot. G/S capture from above for instance. I've ended up in THR CLB OP CLB once. And once only I would like to think as I learnt from the experience (but I wouldn't put it past me!).
Misuse of the automatics has caused many an incident / accident (not to mention an occurance). Perhaps if they had practised their autopilot management skills a bit more.....
We ALL imagine the day when we'll be on battery only and treating our Airbus like it was a Cessna and we train for that in the sim.
I really don't want to sound complacent but let's face it: the thing we should really practise is the use use of the autopilot. G/S capture from above for instance. I've ended up in THR CLB OP CLB once. And once only I would like to think as I learnt from the experience (but I wouldn't put it past me!).
Join Date: Aug 2007
Location: San Antonio, TX USA
Age: 62
Posts: 139
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
Interesting discussion.
I must say that I have never felt in any way insecure being SLF, until this thread appeared. I always thought that all pilots were begging for hand flying time, to feel again what it was that drew their heart to aviation in the first place. What I find now is that there are a large portion of pilots who might be praying something does NOT go belly up forcing them to hand fly.
Sorry gentlemen (and ladies), but I prefer a pilot whose stress level does not go through the roof when a tool is lost. A well-rounded pilot is one who can approach -any- eventuality while airborne with the utmost confidence. This thread seems to be exposing a lack of confidence in the area of manual flight control. That can be quite a bit disconcerting for the folks sitting behind you.
I must say that I have never felt in any way insecure being SLF, until this thread appeared. I always thought that all pilots were begging for hand flying time, to feel again what it was that drew their heart to aviation in the first place. What I find now is that there are a large portion of pilots who might be praying something does NOT go belly up forcing them to hand fly.
Sorry gentlemen (and ladies), but I prefer a pilot whose stress level does not go through the roof when a tool is lost. A well-rounded pilot is one who can approach -any- eventuality while airborne with the utmost confidence. This thread seems to be exposing a lack of confidence in the area of manual flight control. That can be quite a bit disconcerting for the folks sitting behind you.
Guest
Posts: n/a
Centaurus.
Nice post.
Going into NIC yesterday, in our RJ100. all the autos went off.
AP/ AT FD etc.
The FO, for it was his sector, had to slide his seat up and start to work.
My cockles were fairly warmed as I watched him get on with it as I tried to get the autos UP.
He did well.
Nice post.
Going into NIC yesterday, in our RJ100. all the autos went off.
AP/ AT FD etc.
The FO, for it was his sector, had to slide his seat up and start to work.
My cockles were fairly warmed as I watched him get on with it as I tried to get the autos UP.
He did well.
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: in front of my computer
Age: 45
Posts: 37
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
military
I tend to think that military background might be a very good asset when it comes to hand flying and flying skills in general
just a thought
just a thought
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Georgia
Posts: 169
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
What I find now is that there are a large portion of pilots who might be praying something does NOT go belly up forcing them to hand fly.
)I think the large proportion of pilots are praying that "something does NOT go belly up" not out of concern for themselves and the skills they may or may not have, but the crew and pax in their care.
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: flyover country USA
Age: 82
Posts: 4,579
Likes: 0
Received 0 Likes
on
0 Posts
WHYEYEMAN:
I'd rather have a crew who would think automatics OFF to be no more than a minor annoyance. 
In short, life's too short for manual flight in the commercial arena. As a pax, knowing what you know, with your wife and kids on board, would you prefer the automatics/flight director to be on or off?